↓ Skip to main content

Economic support to improve tuberculosis treatment outcomes in South Africa: a qualitative process evaluation of a cluster randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
169 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Economic support to improve tuberculosis treatment outcomes in South Africa: a qualitative process evaluation of a cluster randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-15-236
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Lutge, Simon Lewin, Jimmy Volmink

Abstract

Poverty undermines the adherence of patients to tuberculosis treatment. A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate the extent to which economic support in the form of a voucher would improve patients' adherence to treatment, and their treatment outcomes. Although the trial showed a modest improvement in the treatment success rates of the intervention group, this was not statistically significant, due in part to the low fidelity to the trial intervention. A qualitative process evaluation, conducted in the final few months of the trial, explained some of the factors that contributed to this low fidelity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 165 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 21%
Researcher 24 14%
Student > Postgraduate 9 5%
Other 8 5%
Lecturer 8 5%
Other 34 20%
Unknown 50 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 13%
Social Sciences 21 12%
Unspecified 7 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 4%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 52 31%